Building  consensus  on  a  generic  water  scarcity  indicator  for  LCA-­‐based  water  footprint:  

preliminary  results  from  WULCALCA  Food,  San  Francisco  (USA),  2014

Anne-­‐Marie  Boulay,  Jane  Bare,  Lorenzo  Benini,  Markus  Berger,  Inga  Klemmayer,  Michael  Lathuilliere,   Philippe  Loubet,  Alessandro  Manzardo,  Manuele Margni,  Montserrat  Núñez,  Bradley  Ridoutt,  Sebastien Worbe,  Stephan  Pfister

HumanHealth

EcosystemQuality

Resources

Toxic Impacts

Respiratory effects

Ionizing radiation

Ozone  layer  depletion

Photochem.  oxydation

Acidification

Eutrophication

Land  use

Abiotic ressouce use

Biotic ressource  use

Global  warming

Pesticide

Crude OilIron Ore

Phosphate

CO2

Irrigation  Water

Outputs

Inputs

DieselCu

…

…

Problems Areas  of  protection

WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITHWATER?

2

Water  FootprintWater  availability

ISO  DIS  14046:  Water  footprint:  Principles,  requirements  and  guidelines

3

Developed in  an  international  consensus-­‐based   process  2009  – 2014Approved  in  May  2014Published   in  August  2014

4

Should  be  life-­‐cycle  basedCould  be  “stand-­‐alone”  or  part  of  a  full  Life  Cycle  Assessment  Results  should  include  impact  assessment   (volumes  not  sufficient)  and  address  regional  issuesBoth  quantity  and  quality  should  be  consideredComprehensive  impact  assessment  related  to  water  (not  only  water  use  but  all  impacts  related  to  water)

Can  result  in  one  or  several  indicators

ISO  14046  WATER FOOTPRINTIMPORTANT CONCEPTS

Water Footprint types as per ISO 14046

5

Water availability

Water degradation

MIDPOINTProfile  of  midpoint  indicators

-Water scarcity footprintOR

- Water availability footprint

-Human toxicity-Ecotoxicity-Eutrophication-Acidification

ENDPOINTHuman health -­‐ Malnutrition and/or

water related diseasesHuman toxicity

Ecosystems -­‐ Terrestrial ecosystems- Aquatic ecosystems

-Ecotoxicity-Eutrophication-Acidification

“qualified” water footprint (ex: “degradation” WF, “scarcity” WF, etc)

Water footprint

WULCA  Working groupWater  Use  in  LCA -­‐ International   initiative   for  LCA  (2007)Goal

– Provide  guidance   to  practitioners   and  researchers on  the  topic  of  water  use  impact  assessment   in  LCA

– Transition  into  Phase  3  and  official  acceptance   from  Life  Cycle  Initiative    in  Spring  2013

– Identified   in  Glasgow  as  a  Flagship  category  from  the  Global  Guidance  Flagship  categories   from  UNEP  SETAC  Life   Initiative

6

Anne-­‐Marie  BoulayProject  Manager,  Chair

Stephan  PfisterDeputy  Manager,  Co-­‐Chair

www.wulca-­‐waterlca.org

Laying  the  ground  work

7

Framework  on  how  to  assess  water  use  in  LCA

Qualitative  comparison  of  existing  methods

Quantitative  comparison  of  existing  methods

Development  of  a  

consensual  method  

Development  of  several  new  methods

2009 20132012

Water Inventory (Surface water,

renewable groundwater,

fossil groundwater)

Impact on human health

Impact on Ecosystems

Impact on Resources

Inventory from compensation processes

Compensation processes

Human  health  specific  midpoint

Volume of water to be obtained through

compensation

Ecosystem  specific  midpoint

Resource  specific  midpoint

Stress-­‐based  generic  midpoint

Generic  stress-­‐based  midpoint

9

No  true  common  midpoint  for  human  health  and  ecosystems

Consistent  (proportional)  results  cannot  be  obtained  between  a  midpoint  indicator  and  the  endpoint  indicators

à Regionalization  affects  both  midpoint  and  endpoint  models

Desire  to  develop  a  stress-­‐based  midpoint  indicator  ànot necessarily  correlated  to  HH  and  EQ,  àProvides  a  simple  single  indicator  to  support  decisionà In  compliance  with  ISO  14046

Generic  stress-­‐based  midpoint

10

11

Anthropocentric  scarcity

Ecocentricscarcity

Rank  correlation:  99%

Hydrocentric scarcity  approach

12

Rank  correlation  with  anthropo-­‐ or  ecocentric:  84-­‐85%

13

Next  steps:  Classification  of  the  concepts  of  current  indicators  à The  right  indicator  for  the  right  question

1-­‐ Questions:  “To  which  extent  are  humans  using  the  available  water  in  this  region?”,  “What  is  the  potential  

of  affecting  water  availability  for  human  uses?”

14

Indicator: Based  on  consumption-­‐to-­‐availability  ratio  (CTA)  or  withdrawals-­‐to-­‐availability  ratio  (WTA)  This  indicator  represents  the  intensity  of  human  use  with  respect  to  the  availability  of  water  but  disregards  the  potential  harm  on  ecosystems  (actual  or  future).    

Consumption-­‐to-­‐availability  (CTA)(scale  is  5  equal  groups  of  regions)

15

2-­‐ Questions:  “What  is  the  potential  of  depriving  another  user  from  water,  with  no  specification  of  who  

the  user  is  (i.e.  humans  or  ecosystems)?”

16

Depriving: using  water  that  is  being  used  by  another  user,  which  means  that  if  they  do  not  have  this  water,  they  will  actively   adapt/change  and/or  suffer  consequencesIndicator:  based  on  human  and  ecosystem  demands,  divided  by  available  water  (Demand-­‐to-­‐Availability,   DTA)

à This  indicator  represents   the  intensity  of  the  water  demand   in  comparison  with  availability   in  a  region,  which  means   that  the  higher  the  demand   is  in  comparison   to  what  is  available,   the  more  likely   a  user  will  be  deprived   by  an  additional  demand.  Actual  effects  of  this  deprivation  (adaptation,  change  or  consequences)   are  not  included.  

Demand-­‐to-­‐Availability  (DTA)preliminary

17

Scale  is  5  equal  groups  of  regions

3-­‐ Questions:  “How  much  water  is  available  in  this  region?”,  “What  is  the  risk  of  running  out  of  water?”,  “how  dry  is  the  region?”,  “how  critical  is  the  water  

availability  in  this  area  and  how  much  will  an  additional  use  affect  it?”

18

Indicator: based  on  (available  water  per  area)-­‐1  

This  indicator,  when  multiplied   by  inventory,   provides   the  fraction  corresponding   to  the  water  consumed   compared   to  available.

19

Available  water  per  area

(Available  – consumed)  water  per  area

Conclusions  and  ongoing  work

20

At  this  point,  an  indicator  based  on  the  DTA  ratio  seems  preferred,  but  expert  workshops  are  still  ongoing

It  is  recognized  that  desert  areas  should  be  considered  with  careà LCA  hypothesis  of  “marginal  contribution”  may  not  apply  for  water  consumption  in  these  regions

Current  discussions  on  other  modeling  aspects  (thresholds,  data  source,  regional  and  temporal  resolution,  etc)

Results  expected  in  Spring  2015!à Follow  us:  www.wulca-­‐waterlca.org

and  Linked  In  group  WULCA

SPONSORS

21

QUESTIONS?

22

Anne-­‐Marie  Boulay,  PhDCIRAIG  – Ecole Polytechniquede  Montreal

anne-­‐marie.boulay@polymtl.ca

www.wulca-­‐waterlca.org

Link  with ISO  water  footprint processThere is  no  official  link  between  ISO  DIS  14046  on  Water  footprint  and  WULCA,  however:

-­The convener  and  several  delegates  of  the  ISO  working  group  are  members  of  WULCA-­ The  work of  WULCA  has  served  as  a  basis  in  the  development  of  the  Standard-­The standard  does  not  propose  one  specific  method,  but  rather  Principles,  Requirements  and  Guidelines-­ WULCA  can  propose  this  method  as  the  result  of  a  consensus  which  could  be  integrated in  the  next  review  of  the  standard

23

Goal  of  the  flagship  project

• Establish  a  consensual  set  of  environmental  impact  category  indicators

• For  use  in  – Environmental  product  information  schemes– Corporate  reporting  of  multinational  companies– International  and/or  national  environmental  policies– Common  LCA  work  commissioned  by  governments  and  companies

24

General  outline• Task  1:  Scoping  phase  (2012-­‐2013)

Establish  short  list  of  impact  category  indicators  and  themes  for  first  and  second  stageà Yokohama  2012  &  Glasgow  2013  scoping  workshopsà Stakeholder  feedback    at  events  worldwide

• Task  2:  Consensus  finding,  stage  1  (2013-­‐2015)à Pellston  workshop  1  (with  output  being  an  agreement)

• Task  3:  Consensus  finding,  stage  2  (2015-­‐2017)à Pellston  workshop  2

• Task  4:  Dissemination  (2018)

25

Global  Guidance  on  LCIA  indicatorsChairs:  Olivier  Jolliet  and  Rolf  

Frischknecht

WULCAChair:  Anne-­‐Marie  BoulayCo-­‐chair:  Stephan  Pfister

• Consensus   on  global  warming  indicator • Consensus  on  

water  use  indicator

• Education  and  training

• Guidance   to  practitioners   and  researchers

• Scientific   support  to  other  initiatives   and  events  (e.g.  ISO  TR  14073)

26

• Consensus   on  other  indicators

Current  General  Framework

Water Inventory (Surface water,

renewable groundwater,

fossil groundwater)

Volume of water

unavailable to other users

Volume of water

deprived causing health

damages

Impact on human health

Impact on Ecosystems

Impact on Ressources

Inventory from compensation processes

InventoryMidpoint  impacts

Endpoint  Impacts

Compensation processes

ScarcitySocio-

economic para-meter

Volume of water to be obtained

through compensation

Distribution of water

deprivation

Water deprived for domestic users

Water deprived for fisheries

Water deprived for agriculture

Water-related diseases effect per m3 deprived (dom)

Malnutrition effect per m3 deprived (agri)

Malnutrition effect per m3 deprived

(fish)

Disruption of water balance

Change in flow quantity Terrestrial species

loss per m3

deprivedAquatic species

loss per m3

deprived

Overuse assessment

Change in flow regime

Change in groundwater table

level

Loss of water quality

Overuse of renewable water

bodiesfossil groundwater

depletion

27